Compared to what? Living without electricity? Paying 10x for energy?
The lack of a real comparison with the real life consequences of a zero carbon budget seems a bit too convenient
I really don't think you get it. If temperatures rise enough, most of Central and North America won't be uninhabitable. The parts that aren't underwater will be too hot and parched. We won't be able to grow crops or desalinate enough water when the clouds and rain disappear (yes that will happen).
The 3 days of intense heat here in Portland left plants all around my yard scorched and half dead. Just 3 days. Imagine that happening regularly around the world.
I think you have a typo.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_humid_period
Current climate change seems to be messing with the jet stream in North America in ways that diverge from historical data. Then you get things like your yard scorching in Portland this summer and my hedges freezing and dying in Austin this winter. We've built a huge amount of infrastructure on assumptions about local weather patterns that may now be invalid.
What does this mean?
It seems as "if we just did X everything would be better", when actually there are mostly trade-offs
What that statement is doing is communicating a real sense of dread that maybe we have to do it even though it would be incredibly difficult and costly.